Revista Colombiana de Matematicas

Volumen 41 (2007), paginas 189195

Existence and uniqueness of a
positive steady state solution for
a logistic system of dierential
dierence equations
V

ctor Padr

on
Normandale Community College, USA
Abstract. We prove the existence and uniqueness of a positive solution to a
logistic system of dierential dierence equations that arises as a population
model for a single species which is composed of several habitats connected by
linear migration rates. Our proof is based on the proof of a similar result for a
reaction-advection-diusion equation.
Keywords. Monotone matrices, irreducible matrix, maximum principle.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classication. Primary: 34A34. Secondary: 92D25.
Resumen. En este artculo probamos la existencia y unicidad de una solucion
positiva a un sistema logstico de ecuaciones diferenciales y de diferencias nitas
que surge como un modelo de la poblacion de una especie localizada en un
conjunto discreto de habitats interconectados por tasas lineales de migracion.
Nuestra prueba esta basada en la prueba de un resultado similar para ecuaciones
de reaccion-advecci on-difusi on.
1. Introduction
We consider the system of dierential equations
u

i
(t) =

jI
i
[d
ij
u
j
(t) d
ji
u
i
(t)] +u
i
(t)F
i
_
u
i
(t)
_
, i = 1, , n, t 0. (1.1)
Here d
ij
are positive constants, and I
i
is a nonempty subset of {1, 2, , n}
such that j I
i
implies i I
j
, i, j = 1, , n. We also assume that there is
not a non-empty and proper subset I {1, 2, , n} such that I
i
I for all
189
190 V

ICTOR PADR

ON
i I. This condition on I
i
accounts for assuming that the matrix A = (a
ij
) of
the linear part of (1.1),
a
ij
=
_
_
_
d
ij
, i = j and j I
i
,
0, i = j and j / I
i
,

jI
i
d
ij
, i = j,
(1.2)
is irreducible. The functions F
i
(s), i = 1, , n, verify the following hypothesis:
Hypotheses 1.1.
(1) F
i
is continuously dierentiable.
(2) r
i
:= F
i
(0) > 0, and
i
F

i
(s)
i
for given positive constants

i
,
i
, and any s 0.
This problem arises as a population model for a single species which is
composed of several habitats connected by linear migration rates and having
logistic growth (see [4] and the references therein). In this case u
i
(t) is the
population in habitat i at time t; the coecients d
ij
are the rates at which the
individuals migrate from habitat j to habitat i; and F
i
represents the net rate of
population supply at habitat i. The second condition in Hypothesis 1.1 implies
that there exists 0 < K
i
< , such that f
i
is positive in (0, K
i
) and negative in
(K
i
, +), for i = 1, , n. The value K
i
> 0 is called the carrying capacity of
the population because it represents the population size that available resources
can continue to support. The value r
i
> 0 is called the intrinsic growth rate
and represents the per capita growth rate achieved if the population size were
small enough to ensure negligible resource limitations. For the standard logistic
growth, introduced by P.F. Verhulst [7], F
i
(s) = r
i
_
1
s
K
i
_
.
Continuous time models with multi-patch formulation have also been pro-
posed in the study of the spatial dynamics of epidemics (see [1] and the refer-
ences therein).
The rst condition in Hypothesis 1.1 is technical and is needed together with
the second condition to ensure, given initial data, the existence and uniqueness
of solutions for (1.1) globally dened for t 0, c.f. [3]. Since d
ij
> 0 and the
matrix A is irreducible, (1.1) is a cooperative and irreducible system in IR
n
+
.
This implies that the set C := { IR
n
+
: lim
t
u(t; ) exists} of convergent
points of (1.1) contains an open and dense subset of IR
n
+
, c.f. [5, Theorem 4.1.2,
page 57]. Here, u(t; ) denotes the solution of (1.1) such that u(0; ) = . Thus
the dynamics of (1.1) is largely determined by its equilibria.
It is clear that u 0 is a steady state solution of (1.1). Since F
i
(0) > 0, i =
1, , n, it follows that u 0 is unstable. Hence, by the above argument there
exists at least one nontrivial equilibria u such that lim
t
u(t; ) = u for some
in an open subset of C. In fact it is not dicult to see that when

jI
i
d
ij
K
j
=

jI
i
d
ji
K
i
, i = 1, , n, (1.3)
EXISTENCE AND UNIQUENESS OF A POSITIVE. . . 191
the only nontrivial equilibrium of (1.1) is u = (K
1
, K
2
, , K
n
) (see [4, Theo-
rem 1]). The purpose of this paper is to prove the following theorem regarding
the existence and uniqueness of a nontrivial steady state for (1.1).
Theorem 1.1. There exists one and only one positive steady state solution for
(1.1).
This result is well known for reaction-advection-diusion equations (see [2,
Proposition 3.3, page 148]). Since (1.1) can be seen as a spatially discrete model
analogous to an advection-diusion equation, the same result was expected to
be true for (1.1). Nevertheless, to the best of our knowledge, its proof has not
yet appeared in the literature. In order to stress the similarity of (1.1) to a
reaction-advection-diusion equation, we present a proof that is based on the
corresponding proof for the PDE model.
2. Preliminary results
Consider the linear system

jI
i
d
ij
(x
j
x
i
) + b
i
x
i
= f
i
, i = 1, , n. (2.1)
Here b
i
, and f
i
are given constants.
Theorem 2.1 (Strong Maximum Principle). Suppose that b
i
0, i = 1, , n.
Let x IR
n
be a solution of (2.1), m := min
1in
x
i
, and M := max
1in
x
i
. If
f
i
0, i = 1, , n, and m 0 (resp. f
i
0, i = 1, , n, and M 0), then
x
i
= m (resp. x
i
= M), and f
i
= mb
i
= 0, i = 1, , n. In particular, if
f
i
0 (resp. f
i
0), i = 1, , n, and f 0 or b 0, then m 0 (resp.
M 0).
Remark 2.1. This theorem is a particular version of more general maximum
principles for monotone matrices (see [6, Theorem 2]). We will give an inde-
pendent proof.
Proof of Theorem 2.1. Suppose that f
i
0, i = 1, , n and m 0, (the case
that f
i
0, i = 1, , n and M 0 can be solved similarly). Let I := {i :
x
i
= m}. Clearly, I is non-empty. Suppose that I {1, , n}. Hence, by
our original assumption on the sets I
i
s, there exists i I such that I
i

I
c
is
non-empty. Here, I
c
denotes the complement of I over the set {1, , n}. For
such i we have
f
i
=

jI
i
d
ij
(x
j
x
i
) + b
i
x
i
=

jI
i

I
c
d
ij
(x
j
m) + b
i
m
> 0.
192 V

ICTOR PADR

ON
which is a contradiction. This proves that x
i
= m, i = 1, , n. It follows, by
introducing this value for x
i
in (2.1), that f
i
= mb
i
= 0, i = 1, , n.

We will apply the Strong Maximum Principle to obtain a monotone iteration

scheme for constructing solutions to the general nonlinear system

jI
i
d
ij
(x
j
x
i
) + e
i
x
i
+ f
i
(x
i
) = 0, i = 1, , n. (2.2)
Here f
i
, i = 1, , n are given functions. We will say that x
0
is an upper
solution of (2.2) if x
0
satises

jI
i
d
ij
_
x
0
j
x
0
i
_
+ e
i
x
0
i
+ f
i
_
x
0
i
_
0, i = 1, , n. (2.3)
We will also assume that x
0
is not a solution. Similarly we dene lower
solution by interchanging the order of the inequalities in (2.3).
Theorem 2.2. Suppose that f
i
C
1
(R) for all i, and that x
0
and y
0
are
respectively upper and lower solutions of (2.2) with y
0
i
x
0
i
, i = 1, , n. Then
there exist solutions x and y of (2.2) such that y
0
i
y
i
x
i
x
0
i
, i = 1, , n.
Moreover, x and y are, respectively, maximal and minimal solutions of (2.2), in
the sense that if x is any solution of (2.2) such that y
0
i
x
i
x
0
i
, i = 1, , n
then y
i
x
i
x
i
, i = 1, , n.
Proof. Let m := min
0in
y
0
i
and M := max
0in
x
0
i
. Let k > 0 be a constant such
that k > e
i
, i = 1, , n, and
f

i
(s) + k > 0, 0 i n, s [m, M].
Dene the application T : IR
n
IR
n
by = T where is the solution of
the problem

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
) + (e
i
k)
i
= (f
i
(
i
) + k
i
), i = 1, , n. (2.4)
The matrix of the linear system (2.4) is of the form A kI where A is the
matrix given in (1.2). By the Gershgorin circle theorem we know that A has
non-positive eigenvalues. Hence, since e
i
k < 0, i = 1, , n, the matrix
AkI is invertible, and T is well dened.
We will see that T is a monotonic application in the sense that if
1

2
then T
1
T
2
, provided that m
1
,
2
M. Here
1

2
means

1
i

2
i
for all i. We also write
1
<
2
if
1

2
and
1
i
<
2
i
for some i,
and we write
1

2
if
1
i
<
2
i
for all i. To see this let
i
= T
i
, i = 1, 2.
Then

jI
i
d
ij
__

2
j

1
j
_

2
i

1
i
__
+ (e
i
k)
_

2
i

1
i
_
=
_
f
i
_

2
i
_
f
i
_

1
i
_
+ k
_

2
i

1
i
__
, i = 1, , n.
(2.5)
EXISTENCE AND UNIQUENESS OF A POSITIVE. . . 193
If we assume that
1

2
, then by the choice of k we have

jI
i
d
ij
__

2
j

1
j
_

2
i

1
i
__
+ (e
i
k)
_

2
i

1
i
_
0, i = 1, , n. (2.6)
This implies that
1

2
. It is clear that
1

2
. Suppose that there exists
i such that
1
i
=
2
i
. By the Strong Maximum Principle
1

2
. In this case,
the left hand side of (2.5) is zero. It follows by the choice of k that
1

2
.
Hence, T is monotonic in a stronger sense, i.e. if
1
<
2
then T
1
T
2
.
Let us see now that T if is an upper solution of (2.2). Let = T,
then

jI
i
d
ij
_
(
j

j
) (
i

i
)
_
+ (e
i
k) (
i

i
)
=
_
_

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
) + f
i
(
i
)
_
_
0, i = 1, , n.
(2.7)
Again, by the Strong Maximum Principle , otherwise . This last
option is not possible since by the denition of T, would be a solution of
(2.2) and we assumed that this was not the case.
This observations allow us to dened inductively two sequences {x
n
} and
{y
n
} by letting
_
x
1
, y
1
_
:=
_
Tx
0
, Ty
0
_
and (x
n
, y
n
) :=
_
Tx
n1
, Ty
n1
_
for
n > 1.
Since x
0
is an upper solution, x
1
= Tx
0
x
0
, and by the monotonicity of
T, Tx
1
Tx
0
= x
1
. Hence x
n1
x
n
for each n. Similarly, y
n
y
n1
for
each n. Also, since x
0
> y
0
, we obtain by induction that x
n
y
n
.
This allow us to conclude that {x
n
} is a decreasing sequence bounded below
by y
0
. Hence
x
i
= lim
n
x
n
i
, i = 1, , n,
exists.
Now,
x = lim
n
x
n
= lim
n
Tx
n1
= T lim
n
x
n1
= T x.
Then x is solution of (2.2).
Similarly we can construct a solution y of (2.2) such that y
0
< y < x < x
0
.
Suppose now that x is another solution of (2.2) such that y
0
< x < x
0
. This
implies that x = Tx Tx
0
= x
1
. By induction x x
n
for all n. Hence x x.
Similarly, one shows that y x. This nishes the proof of the theorem.

3. Proof of the main Theorem

The proof of Theorem 1.1 relies in the following lemmas
Lemma 3.1. If x is a solution of (2.2) with f
i
(s) := sF
i
(s), then x
i
a

, i =
1, , n, where a

:= max
1in
_
r
i

i
,
e
i
+r
i

i
_
.
194 V

ICTOR PADR

ON
Proof. Suppose that there exists i such that x
i
> a

. Let i
0
such that x
i
0
=
max
1in
x
i
> a

. Hence e
i
0
x
i
0
+ f
i
0
(x
i
0
) < 0. It follows that

jI
i
0
d
i
0
j
(x
j
x
i
0
) + e
i
0
x
i
0
+ f
i
0
(x
i
0
) e
i
0
x
i
0
+ f
i
0
(x
i
0
)
< 0.
This is a contradiction which proves the lemma.

The steady state solutions of (1.1) are solutions of a system of the form

jI
i
d
ij
(x
j
x
i
) + e
i
x
i
+ x
i
F
i
(x
i
) = 0, i = 1, , n. (3.1)
Lemma 3.2. If the principal eigenvalue
1
is positive in the problem

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
) + e
i

i
+ r
i

i
=
i
, i = 1, , n, (3.2)
where r
i
= F
i
(0), then system (3.1) has one and only one positive solution.
By a positive solution of (3.1) we mean a solution x IR
n
such that x
i
>
0, i = 1, , n.
Proof. To prove the existence of a positive solution of (3.1) we rst notice that
a

:= max
1in
_
r
i

i
,
e
i
+r
i

i
_
is an upper solution of (3.1).
Let a positive eigenvector corresponding to the main eigenvalue
1
of
(3.2). It follows that satises the equation

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
)+e
i

i
+
i
F
i
(
i
) =
i
_

1
r
i
+F
i
(
i
)
_
, i = 1, , n.
Since
1
+ F
i
(
i
) F
i
(0)
1

i

i
we obtain, by choosing > 0 small
enough, that is a positive lower solution of (3.1). We can assume without
loss of generality that
i
< a

, i = 1, , n. It follows by Theorem 2.2 that

(3.1) has a positive solution.
Let x be the maximal solution of (3.1) given by Theorem 2.2 for the upper
solution a

. Suppose that x is another positive solution of (3.1). By Lemma 3.1

x
i
a

, i = 1, , n. Since x is a maximal solution, it follows that 0 x

i
x
i
,
i = 1, , n. We will show that this implies that x = x.
Since x is a positive solution of (3.1) it follows that the principal eigenvalue

1
is zero for the problem

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
) + e
i

i
+ F
i
(x
i
)
i
=
i
, i = 1, , n, (3.3)
Similarly, since x is a positive solution of (3.1) it follows that the principal
eigenvalue

1
is zero for the problem

jI
i
d
ij
(
j

i
) + e
i

i
+ F
i
( x
i
)
i
=
i
, i = 1, , n. (3.4)
EXISTENCE AND UNIQUENESS OF A POSITIVE. . . 195
Assume that there exists i such that x
i
< x
i
. This implies that F
i
( x
i
) <
F
i
(x
i
). Hence, applying the monotonicity property of the principal eigenvalue
of nonnegative irreducible matrices to problems (3.3)-(3.4), it follows that

1
<

1
. This is a contradiction, since

1
=
1
= 0. We conclude that x = x. This
nished the proof of the theorem.

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Since the principal eigenvalue of the matrix A is zero
then the principal eigenvalue of the problem

jI
i
[d
ij

j
d
ji

i
] + r
i

i
=
i
, i = 1, , n, (3.5)
is positive. The theorem follows by applying Lemma 3.2 to (1.1) with e
i
=

jI
i
(d
ij
d
ji
).

References
[1] J. Arino, J. R. Davis, D. Harley, R. Jordan, J. M. Miller & P. Van
Den Driessche, A multi-species model with spatial dynamics, Mathematical
Medicine and Biology 22 (2005), 129142.
[2] R. S. Cantrell & C. Cosner, Spatial Ecology Via Reaction-diusion Equa-
tions, Wiley, Chichestewr West Sussex UK, 2003.
[3] V. Padr on & M. C. Trevisan, Eect of aggregating behavior on population
recovery on a set of habitat islands, Math. Biosc. 165 (2000) 1, 6378.
[4] V. Padr on & M. C. Trevisan, Environmentally induced dispersal under het-
erogeneous logistic growth, Math. Biosc. 199 (2006), 160174.
[5] H. Smith, Monotone Dynamical Systems: An Introduction to the Theory of Com-
petitive and Cooperative Systems, American Mathematical Society, SURV/41,
1995.
[6] G. Stoyan, Maximum principles for monotone matrices, Lin. Alg. Appl. 78
(1986), 147161.
[7] P. F. Verhulst, Notice sur la loi que la population suit dans son accroissement,
Corr. Math. et Phys. 10 (1838), 113121.
(Recibido en abril de 2006. Aceptado en marzo de 2007)
Department of Mathematics
Normandale Community College
9700 France Avenue South, Bloomington
Minnesota, USA
e-mail: victor.padron@normandale.edu